[Foundation-l] Alternative to paypal
gerard.meijssen at gmail.com
Thu Aug 16 10:56:57 UTC 2007
Google is an intenational organisation, you can expect them to provide a
service in France and Germany in the not too distant future. Important to
notice is that they provide their current service in the country where we
make most of our money. When we do not have to pay the three, four percent
on the money we receive from people in the USA it amounts to a serious
amount of money.
I have read what you wrote in the past and you have a point. But that point
only goes so far. At this moment Paypal has it relatively good, there is no
real competition. However I will never give money to the Wikimedia
Foundation through Paypal because I care to see all my money go to the
Foundation. In Europe that is not a real issue as you know.
When it is stated that other organisations are surprised about the amount of
money we make, it shows how much of a trailblazer we are in this field. The
consequence is that we are also the organisation that have to find ways in
order to get a better deal. We can provide really strong arguments to Paypal
because their competition is out competing them.
I see nowhere in your arguments a strategy that will bring the cost of the
money transfers down. Consequently, I agree that Google does not provide a
global service but equally you have to admit that you do not cover the whole
of the argument either.
By expressing our preference for people to use Google Checkout, we do not
have to stop providing Paypal as a payment option or allow for transfers to
a European bank account for Europeans. Their are many options; it is not a
black and white affair.
On 8/16/07, Delphine Ménard <notafishz at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/16/07, GerardM <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > In 2007 using the financial collection system of Google is free. Period
> What I really appreciate in your mailing list particiaptions, Gerard,
> is the way you do take other people's posts into consideration.
> > The money collected in this way in 2007 through Google will not cost us
> > money. Google has indicated in the past that they are happy to help the
> > Wikimedia Foundation, this gives us the opportunity to ask for 2008 if
> > can do something about the cost of the money given to the WMF through
> > Checkout. It isa really good marketing tool for Google to get the
> > of the general public for their payment system; the trick is to get
> > to use it in the first place.
> Right. Go back to my previous post and let me interpret Brad's remark
> a little more broadly.
> Costs are not *always* financial. Tell you what, I just checked out
> Google checkout. I am French, I live in Germany. ie. I want my
> interface in French, with German banking possibilities and please
> Terms of Service in a language I understand for a country I live in.
> Tough luck, none of that available. So much for Google checkout for
> me. And you know what? It doesn't seem to work with Amazon, which is
> the only online store I actually visit. So Why should I bother
> initiating my Google checkout account when I won't ever use it and I
> already have a paypal one?
> I find it to be a very narrow approach to focus on the fact that
> Google checkout costs "us" (ie. Wikimedia) nothing. Again, re-read my
> post. Collecting money might have financial costs, but we need to be
> well aware of the cultural and practical costs. What if Google
> checkout costs us nothing but donations go down by 50% because nobody
> wants to use it?
> I am not saying that we shouldn't try, I am saying that we should be
> very aware of the *real* costs behind one or the other solution. It's
> not you and I giving the money, or if it is, we represent a very very
> small percentage of the donations. *We* can adapt to the "best"
> solution for Wikimedia. Can/will everyone?
> What you call a "trick" I call lack of concern for the people who
> allow our projects to exist further. We should adapt to them, not them
> to us, even if it's good to mention where their donation will have the
> strongest impact.
> La critique, art aisé, se doit d'être constructive. -- Boris Vian in
> *Chroniques du menteur*
> NB. This address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails sent to
> this address will probably get lost.
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
More information about the foundation-l